G(not) and G
Moderators: Chem_Mod, Chem_Admin
-
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:16 am
-
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2019 12:17 am
Re: G(not) and G
G(not) is the standard Gibbs Free energy. So it's the energy in standard conditions. (1 M, 1atm, 25 degrees Celsius)
G is Gibbs Free energy in other conditions
G is Gibbs Free energy in other conditions
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2019 12:17 am
Re: G(not) and G
Is it correct to say that G(not) is used at equilibrium (K value) and G is used for other conditions (Q value)?
-
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 12:16 am
Re: G(not) and G
In addition to all of the above, the relationship between G not and G can be seen in the equation G not= G+RTlnQ.
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:16 am
-
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 12:16 am
Re: G(not) and G
G(not) is at standard conditions whereas G itself doesn't have to be at standard conditions.
-
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:17 am
-
- Posts: 104
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:17 am
Re: G(not) and G
G(not) is at standard Gibbs free energy, thus it is under standard conditions, unlike G.
-
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2019 12:17 am
- Been upvoted: 1 time
Re: G(not) and G
Rafsan Rana 1A wrote:Isn't the equation G = Gnot + RTlnQ ?
Yes, it should be delta G = delta G(naught) + RTlnQ.
-
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:16 am
- Been upvoted: 2 times
Re: G(not) and G
In problem 5G.13 you calculate the delta G of the reaction at equilibrium and then use whether that value is positive or negative to see which way the reaction will proceed (towards reactants or products), but if the reaction is at equilibrium doesn't that mean the reaction is going both ways at the exact same rate and would therefore favor neither direction?
-
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:18 am
- Been upvoted: 2 times
Re: G(not) and G
ASetlur_1G wrote:Is it correct to say that G(not) is used at equilibrium (K value) and G is used for other conditions (Q value)?
Yes for the most part.
-
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:22 am
Re: G(not) and G
ASetlur_1G wrote:Is it correct to say that G(not) is used at equilibrium (K value) and G is used for other conditions (Q value)?
Yes this is essentially correct to say
Re: G(not) and G
G9not) is under standard conditions whereas G is not and G(n0t) will contribute to the value of G
-
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 12:15 am
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:15 am
-
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2019 12:15 am
Re: G(not) and G
Whenever there is a ⁰ on anything (G, H, S), it means that that process is in Standard Conditions.
Return to “Work, Gibbs Free Energy, Cell (Redox) Potentials”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests